GIRIJA SHANKER TEWARI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COUNTER affidavit filed by learned counsel for the complainant is taken on record.

(2.) HEARD Sri Jyotindra Misra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Kapil Misra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Subhash Singh and Alok Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant as well as Sri Alok Mohan Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

(3.) IT has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is the brother -in -law (Jeth) of the deceased. Though as per the post mortem report, post mortem burn injuries were found on the person of the deceased but the applicants live separately from the deceased and her husband in a separate house. In support of his argument, he has annexed voter I.D. and ration card of the husband of the deceased. He submits that even if the allegation is taken to be true on its value regarding demand of money for the business of brick kiln then too it cannot be covered under Section 304 -B I.P.C. as it cannot be assumed as demand of dowry. The husband of the deceased, namely, Ashok is already confined in jail. He submitted that it appears that the dispute was between husband of wife, who live separately from the applicant and they have been falsely implicated only account of said relationship with co -accused Ashok Kumar. There is no eye witness of the occurrence and the allegation against them has been exaggerated. The applicant has no other criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 15.4.2014.